Tag Archives: hazards

Jeff Witte, DNV

Does Your Organization Need a Tool to Assess Risks to the Psychological Well-being of Its Employees?

By Jeff Witte
No Comments
Jeff Witte, DNV

The current pandemic has faced us with unexpected feelings of uncertainty, loneliness and loss. For many people the hustling and bustling environment of productive interaction and communication was the world, within which they gladly spent most of their lives. Recognition, encouragement, appreciative looks, words of respect, collaboration, competition, and workplace friendships have been abruptly taken away. This has left us face to face with computer screens and outdated icons of co-worker’s faces.

As a result, the psychological well-being of employees has become a key factor in performance and productivity at work. To assist organizations with best practices in addressing employee well-being, the International Organization for Standardization has developed ISO 45003 standard.

ISO 45003 – Occupational health and safety management – Psychological health and safety at work – Guidelines for managing psychosocial risks, is an occupational health and safety management standard, which now covers “many areas that can impact a worker’s psychological health, including ineffective communication, excessive pressure, poor leadership and organizational culture”, as stated in the description on ISO.org. It will also help to meet the requirements of ISO 45001 (previously known as OHSAS), the world’s standard for a physical occupational health and safety management system.

Today, organizations can take preventative measures for securing their staff’s mental and physical well-being by implementing ISO 45003. This best practice guidance document covers elements such as:

  • How to identify, recognize and assess risk factors that may psychologically impair the workforce
  • How to determine necessary changes for improvement
  • How to control potential hazards and manage them effectively

Norma McCormick, Project Leader of the ISO technical committee that developed the standard, said on ISO.com, “While many have felt powerless about the impact of recent events, there are many things that can be done to build the resilience of staff and promote a strong organizational culture. This standard brings together international best practice in this area and is relevant to companies of all types and sizes.”

This global standard provides simple and practical ways for organizations to prioritize protection of employees, and others, who are associated with the organization’s activities.

This compilation of best practices will assist organizations with the recognition of psychosocial hazards and risks such as stress, bullying, harassment, violence in the workplace and the like.
These risks, if ignored or unchecked, can cause negative effects on the health, safety and well-being of employees, thus affecting total organizational performance. More importantly, these risks and hazards can lead to health conditions such as diabetes, cardio-vascular disorders and insomnia which, oftentimes, leads to behavior changes like overeating and alcohol and drug abuse.

The potential detrimental impact on employees’ commitment, productivity, and job satisfaction are clear. Organizations that do not recognize the risks and hazards, or choose to ignore them, will see increased absence from work due to sick leave, high turnover, declining quality of products and/or services, which in turn can cause additional expenses or layoffs, litigation and incident investigations resulting in low morale and damage to the brand.

If you’ve been looking for guidance and best practice in dealing with workforce health and safety in these trying times, take a look at 45003 and its potential benefits:

  1. High levels of discretionary effort
  2. Improved recruitment, retention and diversity
  3. Enhanced worker engagement
  4. Increased innovation
  5. Legal compliance
  6. Reduced absence from workplace due to stress, burnout, anxiety, and depression.1

As a guideline, ISO 45003 is a non-certifiable standard that can be assessed for compliance by an independent third party, like DNV. It can be conducted as a stand-alone assessment or in combination with an ISO 45001 (Occupational Health and Safety) management system certification audit.

Having achieved compliance to ISO 45003, you will demonstrate that you care and have the right measures in place for improvement of your workers’ health and well-being.

1Source: https://www.dnv.us/services/iso-45003-psychological-health-and-safety-at-work-204506

Susanne Kuehne, Decernis
Food Fraud Quick Bites

Sergeant Pepper On Duty

By Susanne Kuehne
No Comments
Susanne Kuehne, Decernis
Pepper, food fraud
Find records of fraud such as those discussed in this column and more in the Food Fraud Database, owned and operated by Decernis, a Food Safety Tech advertiser. Image credit: Susanne Kuehne

A Northern Ireland-based analytical lab added white pepper to its portfolio of food authenticity tests based on spectroscopy with chemometric analysis. White pepper, the ripe berries of the piper nigrum plant, is undergoing an additional production step, fetches a higher price than black pepper and therefore is a target for fraudsters. Often, bulking substances like skins, flour, husks and spent materials are used, but in some cases of pepper fraud, the substances used were hazardous to human health.

Resource

  1. Taylor, P. (August 24, 2021). “With white pepper fraud on the up, Bia unveils authenticity test”. Securing Industry.
CEA Food Safety Certification

CEA Food Safety Coalition Establishes First Food Safety Certification for Leafy Greens Grown Indoors

By Food Safety Tech Staff
No Comments
CEA Food Safety Certification

Last week the CEA Food Safety Coalition announced the first food safety certification program for leafy greens grown indoors. The food safety addendum intends to address the distinct attributes of controlled environment agriculture (CEA) as it relates to leafy greens and is a certification in addition to demonstrating GFSI compliance.

“Current food safety standards were written for the field, and many do not address the unique attributes of controlled, indoor environments,” said Marni Karlin, executive director of the Coalition in a press release. “This new certification process and the accompanying on-pack seal helps to unify CEA growers while also differentiating them from traditional field agriculture. It also better informs consumers and provides a quick-glance image to know when produce has been grown safely indoors, with a high standard of quality and without some of the hazards of the field, such as potential contamination from animal byproducts.”

CEA Food Safety Certification
CEA Food Safety Certification

CEA is a technology-forward method that establishes optimal growing conditions in controlled environments such as greenhouses and indoor vertical farms. The certification program is for CEA FSC members (at a cost) and is completed annually. It assesses CEA grower sites in the four main areas:

  • Hazard analysis.: Including use of water, nutrients, growing media, seeds, inputs and site control.
  • Water use. Any contact with the plant and food contact surfaces, along with the use of recirculating water.
  • Site control, infrastructure and system design. Including direct and adjacent food contact surfaces, and physical hazards such as lighting, robotics, sensors, and equipment.
  • Pesticide and herbicide use and testing during the plant lifecycle.
Listeria

Virtual Event Targets Challenges and Best Practices in Listeria Detection, Mitigation and Control

By Food Safety Tech Staff
No Comments
Listeria

Next month, Food Safety Tech will host the first event in its Food Safety Hazards Series, “Listeria Detection, Mitigation, Control & Regulation” on April 15. The virtual event features Sanjay Gummalla, Ph.D., senior vice president of scientific & regulatory affairs at AFFI; April Bishop, senior director of food safety at TreeHouse Foods; and Douglas Marshall, Ph.D., chief scientific officer at Eurofins. These experts will address Listeria from the perspective of food manufacturing and preventing the introduction of the pathogen; risk based and practical approaches to address the presence of Listeria in food production and achieve key publish health goals relative to the pathogen; how to implement a strong Listeria control program; and the testing challenges from a lab perspective.

The event begins at 12 pm ET on Thursday, April 15.

Presentations are as follows:

  • Listeria Control and New Approaches to Addressing Risks, by Sanjay Gummalla
  • Managing Food Safety and Sanitation in the Digital Age, by April Bishop
  • Listeria Testing: Choosing the Right Method and Target, by Doug Marshall

The presentations will be followed by a panel discussion and a live Q&A with attendees.

Register now for the Food Safety Hazards Series: Listeria Detection, Mitigation, Control & Regulation

Susanne Kuehne, Decernis
Food Fraud Quick Bites

The Golden Goose, A Timeless Moneymaker

By Susanne Kuehne
No Comments
Susanne Kuehne, Decernis
Donkey, Decernis
Find records of fraud such as those discussed in this column and more in the Food Fraud Database. Image credit: Susanne Kuehne

Grimm’s Fairy Tale got it right after all: The “Golden Donkey” (German expression for “Golden Goose”) does indeed exist. In India, officials shut down a factory producing fake turmeric, chili powder and other spices and condiments. Authorities confiscated mostly inedible and hazardous ingredients, which included man-made pigments and colorants, acids, hay and last but not least, donkey dung. The health impact and where the “spices” were sold in retail are under investigation.

Resource

  1. Mishra, S. (December 16, 2020). “Police raid factory making counterfeit spices ‘out of donkey dung and acid’”. Independent.
Earl Arnold, AIB International
FST Soapbox

HACCP is the Past, Present and a Building Block for the Future

By Earl Arnold
No Comments
Earl Arnold, AIB International

“Food safety plan” is a term often used in the food industry to define an operation’s plan to prevent or reduce potential food safety issues that can lead to a serious adverse health consequence or death to humans and animals to an acceptable level. However, depending on the facility, their customers, and or regulatory requirements, the definition and specific requirements for food safety plans can be very different. To ensure food safety, it’s important that the industry finds consensus in a plan that is vetted and has worked for decades.

One of the first true food safety plans was HACCP. Developed in 1959 for NASA with the assistance of the food industry, its goal was to ensure food produced for astronauts was safe and would not create illness or injury while they were in space. This type of food safety plan requires twelve steps, the first five of which are considered the preliminary tasks.

  1. Assemble a HACCP team
  2. Describe the finished product
  3. Define intended use and consumer
  4. Create process and flow diagram
  5. Verify process and flow diagrams

This is followed by the seven principles of HACCP.

  1. Conduct the hazard analysis
  2. Identify critical control points
  3. Establish critical limits
  4. Establish monitoring requirements
  5. Establish corrective actions for deviations
  6. Procedures for verification of the HACCP plan
  7. Record keeping documenting the HACCP system

HACCP is accompanied by several prerequisites that support the food safety plan, which can include a chemical control program, glass and brittle plastics program, Good Manufacturing Practices (GMPs), allergen control program, and many others. With these requirements and support, HACCP is the most utilized form of a food safety plan in the world.

When conducting the hazard analysis (the first principle of HACCP), facilities are required to assess all products and processing steps to identify known or potential biological, chemical and physical hazards. Once identified, if it is determined that the hazard has a likelihood of occurring and the severity of the hazard would be great, then facilities are required to implement Critical Control Points (CCP) to eliminate or significantly reduce that identified hazard. Once a CCP is implemented, it must be monitored, corrective actions developed if a deviation in the CCP is identified and each of these are required to be verified. Records then also need to be maintained to demonstrate the plan is being followed and that food safety issues are minimized and controlled.

HACCP is, for the most part, the standard food safety plan used to meet the Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI) standards. This is utilized in various third-party audit and customer requirements such as FSSC 22000, SQF, BRC, IFS and others. These audit standards that many facilities use and comply with also require the development of a food safety management system, which includes a food safety plan.

Further, HACCP is often used to demonstrate that potential food safety issues are identified and addressed. FDA has adopted and requires a regulated HACCP plan for both 100% juice and seafood processing facilities. USDA also requires the regulated development of HACCP for meat processing and other types of facilities to minimize potential food safety issues.

For facilities required to register with the FDA—unless that facility is exempt or required to comply with regulated HACCP—there is a new type of food safety plan that is required. This type of plan builds upon HACCP principles and its steps but goes beyond what HACCP requires. Under 21 CFR 117, specific additions assist in identifying and controlling additional food safety hazards that are on the rise. This includes undeclared allergen recalls, which constituted 47% of recalls in the last reportable food registry report published by FDA.

Prior to developing this plan, FDA provided recommendations for preliminary steps that can be completed and are essential in development of a robust food safety plan but are not a regulatory requirement. The steps are very similar to the preliminary tasks required by HACCP, including the following:

  1. Assemble a food safety team
  2. Describe the product and its distribution
  3. Describe the intended use and consumers of the food
  4. Develop a flow diagram and describe the process
  5. Verify the flow diagram on-site

Their recommended plan also requires a number of additional steps, including:

  1. A written hazard analysis. Conducted by or overseen by a Preventive Controls Qualified Individual (PCQI). However, this hazard analysis requires assessing for any known or reasonably foreseeable biological, chemical, physical, radiological, or economically motivated adulteration (food fraud that historically leads to a food safety issue only). You may note that two additional hazards—radiological and EMA—have been added to what HACCP calls for in the assessment.
  2. Written preventive controls if significant hazards are identified. However, similar preventive controls are different than a CCP. There are potentially four types of preventive controls that may be utilized for potential hazards, including Process Preventive Controls (the same as CCP), Allergen Preventive Controls, Sanitation Preventive Controls, Supply Chain Preventive Controls and Others if identified.
  3. A written supply chain program if a Supply Chain Preventive Control is identified. This includes having an approved supplier program and verification process for that program.
  4. A written recall plan if a facility identified a Preventive Control.
  5. Written monitoring procedures for any identified Preventive Control that includes the frequency of the monitoring what is required to do and documenting that monitoring event.
  6. Written corrective actions for identified Preventive Controls in case of deviations during monitoring. Corrective actions must be documented if they occur.
  7. Written verification procedures as required. This could include how monitoring and corrective actions are verified, procedures themselves are verified, and calibration of equipment as required. Also required is training, including a Preventive Control Qualified Individual. Additional training is required for those individuals responsible for performing monitoring, implementing corrective actions, and verification of Preventive Controls. Further, all personnel need to have basic food safety training and all training needs to be documented.

While the term “food safety plan” is used widely, it’s important that operations don’t just use the term, but enact a plan that is vetted, proven to work, and encompasses the principles of HACCP. Doing so will help ensure that their facility is producing foods that customers and consumers will know is safe.

Susanne Kuehne, Decernis
Food Fraud Quick Bites

Many Bad Apples Spoil the Bunch

By Susanne Kuehne
No Comments
Susanne Kuehne, Decernis
Rotten apples
Find records of fraud such as those discussed in this column and more in the Food Fraud Database. Image credit: Susanne Kuehne

Food fraud can have a substantial impact on a consumer’s health, like in this case of fruit juice that was sold (including to school lunch programs) in spite of contamination with arsenic and mycotoxins. The fruit used for the juice was decomposing, and also processed in a facility that unacceptably violated hygiene and food safety standards. The FDA filed a lawsuit against the company, which in the meantime has ceased operations.

Resource

  1. Vigdor, N. (November 10, 2020) “School Lunch Program Supplier Sold Juice With High Arsenic Levels, U.S. Says in Lawsuit”. The New York Times.

 

Susanne Kuehne, Decernis
Food Fraud Quick Bites

Things Do Not Get Better With Sage

By Susanne Kuehne
No Comments
Susanne Kuehne, Decernis
Sage, food fraud
Find records of fraud such as those discussed in this column and more in the Food Fraud Database. Image credit: Susanne Kuehne

Herbs remain a target for fraudsters. The latest investigation of sage samples by the Institute of Global Food Security (IGFS) at Queen’s University Belfast used a combination of spectroscopic and chemometric methods to check whether sage contained 100% of the actual herb. One quarter of samples from the UK included unapproved (fortunately, no hazardous) bulk material, such as tree leaves, some in significant concentrations of more than half of the product.

Resource

  1. Sage News”. (November 9, 2020). The Hippocratic Post.

 

Sudip Saha, Future Market Insights
FST Soapbox

Five Trends Defining the Food Industry Post-COVID

By Sudip Saha
No Comments
Sudip Saha, Future Market Insights

Food retailers and the entire food and beverage (F&B) industry are now operating very differently than they did some six months ago. The pandemic has brought immense shifts in supply chains, imposed new hazard controls, and—perhaps most importantly—turned consumer preferences upside down.

To accommodate these changes, food manufacturers, retailers, restaurants and others stepped up to innovate and secure the continuity of their services. But now, as many industries begin to drop the notion of ever going back to what once was, it’s time we started thinking about how many of the newly introduced processes will stick around for the long-term.

What will be the main trends defining the food industry as a whole post-COVID?

Adopted Habits Aren’t Going Anywhere

The pandemic brought radical changes to our everyday lives, and it’s clear that many of the newly adopted behaviors won’t disappear overnight. Consumers will continue to rely on grocery retailers to keep them both fed and healthy while expecting minimum disruptions and a high respect for safety regulations—both in terms of handling and the state of delivered products.

Take-home grocery sales grew by 17% between April and July, breaking the record for the fastest period of growth since 1994. Online grocery shopping also gained popularity while managing to engage entirely new demographics. Some 10% of baby boomers now say they would buy more groceries online once the pandemic is over—compared to 34% of Gen Xs and 40% of millennials.

Due to consumer hyper-awareness of safety and sanitation, the whole food industry will continue to be defined by safety practices. Sanitizing common surfaces like keyboards, door handles, tables and chairs regularly will remain the norm. Beyond “manual” rules such as the mandatory use of facemasks, requirements such as regular health checks could boost the adoption of technology across the industry—transforming not only customer-facing interactions but also the processes behind the curtain.

Technology as an Enabler

Every crisis sparks innovation, and the food industry has certainly proved this thesis. Technology has become the ultimate aide, enabling interactions that would otherwise be impossible. These include contactless ordering, payments and pickup—processes that are likely to stick around even beyond COVID-19.

At the same time, the pandemic accelerated the usage of innovations that previously struggled to become mainstream. This includes virtual tipping jars or mobile order-and-pay, such as the options introduced by fast-food giants including McDonald’s, Subway, KFC, and Burger King.

There’s an obvious appetite for F&B companies to further incorporate technology. For example, the Coca-Cola Company is rolling out a touchless fountain experience that can be used with a smartphone for contactless pouring. Heineken, on the other hand, turned to virtual tech to launch a new product—a cardboard topper for multipack beer that will eliminate plastic from millions of cans. With travel restrictions hindering the mobility of engineers, the company leveraged virtual technology to install the new machinery needed at its Manchester-based factory.

But it’s not just solitary innovations; the market has already seen new AI-based technologies that help food businesses better manage risk in their workforce. Food manufacturing, distribution and provision require many different touchpoints; by predicting, monitoring and testing the health and safety of the workers involved in these processes, companies can ensure they keep their operations running, even if another wave of COVID-19 hits. Solutions like these will be crucial when looking to add another layer of safety that goes beyond mandatory governmental regulations.

Food Safety Revamped

Even though COVID-19 is transmitted through airborne respiratory droplets, and the risk of contracting the virus through food is low, people around the world are concerned about the possibility. After all, 40% of people are more careful about washing unpackaged fruit and vegetables than before the pandemic.

The pandemic has already made societies rethink various established concepts, such as wet markets or the consumption of wild animals. The pandemic could, therefore, lead to changed behaviors, and newly imposed rules such as formalizing small and micro food enterprises, provisions for direct sales by farmers, leveraging technology to ensure safety, and investments in a more robust food infrastructure altogether.

Such changes could also irreversibly affect street food—a sector that is bound to feel the hit of COVID-19. Particularly in countries with diverse street food culture, one of the emerging trends will be the rise of gourmet street food brands that can provide both great taste and high hygiene standards.

Food Sustainability to the Forefront

2020 will be a year of reckoning for the world’s food systems. The pandemic exposed the flaws of the global food supply chain that continues to be highly centralized and operating on a just-in-time basis. This is why we have seen panic food runs, urgent supply shortages and high amounts of food waste as many businesses were shut down overnight. In developing countries, several agencies expect that a “hunger pandemic” and a doubling of people starving could happen unless serious action is taken.

As we rethink the underlying principles of the food industry such as safety and supply, other concepts such as transparency and visibility into product sourcing and manufacturing also come into the spotlight. Consumers across the globe are more likely to prioritize offerings that are healthy and locally sourced than they were before COVID-19.

Food produced with the overuse of chemicals in monoculture cropping systems and large-scale animal farming significantly impact the availability of natural resources and cause substantial greenhouse gas emissions. Added to that, practices like industrial animal farming that operate with large numbers of livestock in confined spaces are a breeding ground for viruses, and have been linked to prior outbreaks such as the outbreak of swine flu in 2009. They also enable the spread of antibiotic-resistant organisms due to the common overuse of antibiotics administered to prevent infections caused by cramped living conditions.

Consumers are increasingly aware of this: Nearly 25% of Americans are now eating more plant-based food. As we move forward, diverse food companies are likely to tap into this trend, resulting in great opportunities for plant-based, nutritious, local, and even healthy DIY meals and products. For example, an Australian food producer has recently announced the launch of a new proprietary product range that will offer the first vegan ready-to-drink protein shakes on the Australian market.

A New Way of Dining

The restaurant market has been one of the direct victims of the pandemic but has shown impressive elasticity in adapting to the new realities. Many businesses have introduced service extensions such as deliveries and take-outs, as well as pop-up grocery stores. Enjoying great popularity, some of these options will stick around far beyond the pandemic.

However, there’s a counterforce hindering significant expansion: The simple fact that many consumers discovered a new joy in cooking. A recent study notes that 54% of Americans are now cooking more than they were before the pandemic, with 35% saying that they “enjoy cooking more now than ever.” But at the same time, 33% of consumers say they’re getting more takeout than before the pandemic. This implies that the post-pandemic normal will likely see a shift toward eating at home more often, whether that means cooking or takeout and delivery.

Therefore, restaurants are likely to continue diversifying their services, experiment with food bundles and DIY meal kits, or even luxurious in-home chef visit experiences as an alternative to high-end restaurant dining.

The past crises have shown that economic uncertainty is directly linked to changes in demand for private-label and value brands. After the 2008 financial crisis, 60% of U.S. consumers were more interested in reasonably priced products with core features than in higher-priced, cutting-edge products. So while luxury dining is not completely disappearing, it could take on other aspects.

In Denmark, for example, a two-Michelin star restaurant is moving to serve burgers. In China, a country that many look to as the model for the post-COVID world, there has also been a clear push toward more affordable dining as well. Hot pot and barbecue venues have been thriving, particularly among customers in their 20s and 30s. Many fine dining restaurants, on the other hand, have started offering affordable lunch menus or have cut prices to correspond to the current value-conscious behaviors.

It’s clear that the future of food retail and the F&B industry will be significantly marked by the pandemic. Its prolonged nature will also cause the newly adopted habits to become further solidified—and many processes will adapt to match them. For example, while contactless deliveries were accelerated in the past months, businesses are working hard to make them as efficient as convenient as possible, making it unlikely that such investments would be erased overnight, once COVID-19 is no longer a threat.

OSHA

OSHA Fines Smithfield Foods, JBS for Failing to Protect Workers from COVID-19

By Food Safety Tech Staff
No Comments
OSHA

Last week OSHA cited Smithfield Packaged Meats in Sioux Falls, South Dakota for failing to protect its workers from COVID-19 exposure. The federal agency issued a fine of $13,494 and cited a violation of failing to provide a violation-free environment following an inspection. More than 1200 workers for Smithfield Foods have contracted COVID-19 and four have died since April. The company, which produces 5% of the nation’s pork, has been under investigation since the early spring for its workplace conditions and the large coronavirus outbreak among employees. It has continued to defend itself against “misinformation”, with President and CEO Kenneth Sullivan going as far as submitting a letter to Senators Elizabeth Warren and Cory Booker at the end of June. Smithfield has 15 business days to pay the fine or contest the citation—and the company will reportedly contest the fine, as a company spokesperson called it “wholly without merit”.

During the September 17 Episode of the 2020 Food Safety Consortium Virtual Conference Series, experts will discuss COVID-19, worker safety and managing quality in the new normal | Register NowOSHA also slapped meat packer JBS with a proposed fine of $15,615, also for a “violation of the general duty clause for failing to provide a workplace free from recognized hazards that can cause death or serious harm”. Nearly 300 workers have reportedly contracted COVID-19, and seven employees died. JBS also has 15 days to comply with or contest the fine, which a company spokesperson said is “entirely without merit” and that OSHA was trying to enforce a standard not even in existence in March.

“Contrary to the allegations in the citation, the Greeley facility is in full compliance with all recommended guidance and hazard abatements. The facility has been audited and reviewed by multiple health professionals and government experts, including the CDC, local and state health departments, third-party epidemiologists, and the Department of Labor, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, who twice visited the plant during the citation period, and issued favorable reports on April 20 and May 8,” according to a statement by a JBS spokesperson. “The Greeley facility has only had 14 confirmed positives in the past three and half months, representing 0.4% of our Greeley workforce, despite an ongoing community outbreak. The facility has not had a positive case in nearly seven weeks, despite more than 1,730 positives in the county and more than 33,300 positive cases in the state during the same time period.”

Meanwhile Kim Cordova, president of the union that represents JBS workers, stated that the company penalty is simply a drop in the bucket and not severe enough. “A $15,000 ‘penalty’ from OSHA is nothing to a large company like JBS. In fact, it only incentivizes the company to continue endangering its employees. The government has officially failed our members, the more than 3,000 workers at JBS Greeley, who have protected the food supply chain while our communities quarantined during the pandemic. It is immoral and unethical, but in the current Administration, unfortunately not illegal, that OSHA waited seven months to investigate the unsafe working conditions that led to this deadly outbreak. Because of this failure, JBS Greeley is the site of the most meat processing plant worker deaths in the nation due to Covid-19.”