Tag Archives: quality

IFT logo

IFT Rebrands Quality Management Division to Highlight Food Safety Focus

By Food Safety Tech Staff
No Comments
IFT logo

The Institute of Food Technologists (IFT), a nonprofit scientific organization committed to advancing the science of food and its application across the global food system, has rebranded its Quality Management Division. The newly named Food Safety & Quality Management Division (FSQM)—announced on World Food Safety Day 2023—brings together more than 1,500 members from more than 60 countries to collaborate, network, and share ideas around food safety. IFT chose to rebrand the division to better reflect the overall responsibilities of its members who focus on assurance, quality control, food safety, and food wholesomeness.

IFT’s topical, interest-based groups, known as Divisions, support learning, collaboration, and innovation through the sharing of knowledge via webcasts and podcasts, online forums, and in-person events. In total, the organization hosts 25 Divisions spanning the science of food.

“Rebranding to Food Safety & Quality Management Division communicates to the food community that this Division is a home for those interested in food safety,” added Eric Ewert, Chair of IFT’s Food Safety & Quality Management Division.

 

 

Melody Ge
Women in Food Safety

Don’t Let the Challenges Distract You

By Food Safety Tech Staff
No Comments
Melody Ge

Compassion is at the core of food safety, and it is a trait that shines through for anyone who has had the opportunity to meet Melody Ge. As the Director of Food Safety & Quality Assurance (FSQA) at StarKist, which produces nearly 50% of canned food goods on the market, and founder of Women in Food Safety, Ge has devoted her career to helping others—both by protecting consumers and by nurturing young professionals.

We spoke with Ge to learn more about her background, her career and what drives her success as a food safety leader.

What led you to a career in food safety?

Ge: My mom worked for food safety labs, and I knew that she was doing something good that was helping society. After graduating from University of Maryland with a Food Science, Technology and Nutrition degree, I started my job with Beyond Meat in R&D and food safety & quality. During my time there, I was on a business trip with one of my grad school classmates who accidently had a serious shrimp allergic reaction at a restaurant where we ate together during the trip. Even though he emphasized that he is allergic to shrimp to the waiter. This was over 10 years ago, and it still gives me goose pumps. I am always a person willing to help, and to see him go through that was a traumatic experience.

At that moment, I understood firsthand the critical role that food safety plays in society. That experience combined with my own work experience made me want to focus on food safety, and I found my passion. I started to focus my career path on safety and quality by working for GFSI CPOs, EU retailers, manufacturers, and other stakeholders.

What are some of the biggest challenges you’ve faced working in food safety and quality assurance?

Ge: I always say that FSQA professionals are heroes because they take a lot of what they do to heart. They put a lot of responsibility on their own shoulders to protect consumers. Often, FSQA professionals are seen as the police of operations. So, communication is one of the challenges: how we can translate the technical knowledge and share the sense of urgency to other department stakeholders within the company so we can achieve FSQA together within the business?

The other challenge is on the technical side. We deal with an evolving environment. For example, what we knew about listeria 10 years ago is different than what we know today. The regulations are always changing. Hence, keep ourselves updated and keep learning are crucial.

Do you have any tips or strategies on how to do that in the midst of doing your day-to-day job?

Ge: My advice would be to use the pieces or fragments of time. You don’t have to devote two hours of your day to learn a new policy, for example, the new FDA traceability rules. Sometimes, while I’m sitting down having my coffee, I am scanning the news, and that’s learning. When I’m having lunch, I try to look at some webinar recordings, and that’s learning. When you have small pieces of time throughout the day, you actually can learn quite amount of new information. Subscribe to the industry publications like Food Safety Tech and Food Quality, and learn from everyone around you. I learn from my team and my coworkers. I also send them to webinars and then we learn from each other.

You mentioned that a lot of people view FSQA as the police of the company. How do you overcome that?

Ge: Being an influencer, proactive communicator and trusted member of the team are keys to success. I find a way to communicate all these important aspects to the team at Starkist. I do feel lucky that at Starkist I am working with people who are aware of food safety and quality constantly. And now with social media and the direct face to consumers it offers, people overall are more aware of food safety and quality. There is a fundamental basic knowledge out there.

I try to use the audience’s language, whether its senior management or production employees. I also stay connected with the line people. Every time I’m in the plant, I walk with them and talk with them. I make them aware that I’m not picking on them; it’s about the products that get produced and consumed. And I am still practicing this every day to be better.

You are also the founder of Women in Food Safety. When did that group start, and what led you to put that together?

Ge: The group started in January 2020 with the intention of helping the younger generations. The initial idea was to provide a resource and a platform for students and industry, and this evolved after I met my committee members. Now we have two missions:  First to pipeline the younger generation and second to help bridge the gap between academia and industry.

We have five focuses:

  • Diversity in Culture. We really focus on supporting people who are coming from different cultures to help them adapt within their companies.
  • Adventure Starts. This is for the students and early first and second year professionals in the industry
  • Leadership. Believe it or not, there were a lot of females stuck in at the manager level for over eight years, and then it’s very hard to move up. This focus is to help them climb that ladder to eventually become an executive in the industry.
  • Boots on the Ground. One of the challenges in food safety is how we work with the line people at the plants to communicate food safety and how to adapt our working style in the manufacturer environment.
  • Work and Life Balance. This is not just for women who are having children; it’s also about how to take your breaks in life, enjoy your downtime and your family, and still stay up to date and come back to the industry as a new leader or professional at any time you are ready again.

How can people get involved in Women in Food Safety?

Ge: We have a LinkedIn group. You do need to be approved to get in just to keep the group focused on the mission and the industry needs, and keep it from being diluted into a commercial group. The group now has around 900 members. With our two—almost three—years partnership with Food Safety Tech, we have more and more influence. We now hold in-person events at the Food Safety Consortium and also at IAFP with the students. We also have a website, and it’s free to subscribe.

If you could turn the clock back to when you were just starting in the industry, what would you tell your younger self and would you have made different decisions?

Ge: I would say, “You are on the right path! Don’t let the difficulties and challenges happening in your career distract you or change you. You know who you are and you know what you’re doing.”

I don’t regret any of my decisions because they all made me the Melody I am today. In some cases, I chose to leave a very good boss for a better career, which was very hard for me. Those decisions and challenges still make me sad till today but I don’t regret those moves.

When people ask me, “How did you get such a wide variety of experience?” It is because I stepped out of my comfort zone, even though it was scary. I made decisions for myself that long-term I knew were going to help my career.

What advice would you offer professionals who are just starting their careers in food safety?

Ge: Try different things and say yes. Just say yes! Every time I get the question, “Can you do this?” I say, “Yes!” and then I figure it out. Don’t hesitate when there are new opportunities, and learn from anything you do at the moment. When I first started, I worked for three years in customer service. I answered emails and phone calls from suppliers who had technical questions. Was it a really fun job? Maybe not. But it helped me so much even up to today when I’m implementing any GFSI CPOs, I remember the details of the clauses. So, enjoy what you do—that is the foundation of doing a job well. Be patient, and keep in mind that nothing you do will be wasted. It’s all part of your own puzzle, and those pieces will eventually all come together.

What’s your opinion on mentors and mentorship?

Ge: One thing about mentoring I do want to share is that it is not a matter of saying, “I need a mentor so I’m going to go out and find myself one!” Mentoring is a concept. It’s a chemistry that naturally happens between two people learning from each other. You know this person will help you; or maybe it’s their style that influences you, and you don’t feel awkward to be vulnerable in front of them. There are many professionals in the industry who are my mentors—sometimes they might not know it. I learn from them and translate what I learn in a way that I can maintain based on my personality, so it’s sustainable.

What’s the main driver that keeps you in food safety?

Ge: Every day is a different day. I am not a person who likes doing things according to a preset list, meaning when you walk into the office you know exactly what you’re going to do that day. I enjoy investigating and identifying problems and finding solutions. That’s what keeps me in FSQA.

Another thing is this is a very friendly industry. I really like the people who work in food safety and quality. We are open to each other. We share best practices and knowledge. We ask questions and we share knowledge. We are like friends and family.

What are some of your hobbies or interests outside of work?

Ge: I try to learn something new every year. Each January, I set a personal goal for myself for the year. For example, in the past, I have learned photography, flamenco, surfing and so on. Some I maintained, and some I don’t because I don’t like them after I tried. Last year, I started learning Korean. I am a scuba diver and a yoga instructor. I try to explore new things each year. I am not an expert on those different things, but they expose me to new ideas, which keeps me energized.

 

FSC Logo

Addressing Today’s Food Safety Challenges: Food Safety Consortium Brings Networking, Discussion and Education to New Jersey

FSC Logo

The 10th Annual Food Safety Consortium will take place in person October 19-21 in Parsippany, New Jersey. The 2022 program features panel discussions and breakout sessions that address key issues, challenges and opportunities for food safety and quality professionals.

Keynote “Leading with Science at FSIS” – Dr. Denise Eblen, Assistant Administrator, Office of Public Health Science, USDA, Food Safety & Inspection Service

The three-day consortium will open at 1:00pm on October 19. The keynote address and Q&A with Dr. Eblen of the USDA FSIS will be followed by panel discussions on the State of the Food Safety Industry, moderated by Dr. Darin Detwiler, Director of the Master of Science in the Regulatory Affairs of Food and Food Industries, Northeastern University, and Food Safety Culture: Communicating to the C-Suite, moderated by Deb Coviello, founder of Illumination Partners, followed by an opening night networking reception.

Days two and three feature panel discussions covering food safety culture, technology, supply chain and reformulation challenges and compliance concerns, as well as a presentation by Frank Yiannas, FDA Deputy Commissioner for Food Policy and Response. Attendees can join the faculty of more than 25 top-level food safety and quality professionals to discuss:

Food Safety & Quality 4.0: Data Analytics and Continuous Improvement: Jill Hoffman, Senior Director, Food Safety and Quality, B&G Foods, Gina Kramer, Director Partnerships & Learning, Center for Foodborne Illness & Prevention, OSU, and Steven Mandernach, Executive Director, AFDO

Quality & Manufacturing Efficiency: How Does Quality Show Value to the Organization? Gary Smith, Vice President of Quality Systems, Gourmet Foods and Gift Baskets, 1800FLOWERS.COM and John Butts, Founder & Principal, Food Safety By Design

Food Defense & Cybersecurity: Jason Bashura, Senior Manager, Global Defense Pepsi Co.

Diversification of Supply Chain Capacity: Trish Wester, President, Association for Food Safety Auditing Professionals, and Allison Milewski, Sr. Director, US Brand Quality, Mondelēz International

COVID-19 & Food Supply (Research Presentation): Presented by Dr. Donald Schaffner, Rutgers University and Dr. Ben Chapman, North Carolina State University

Product Reformulation Challenges: April Bishop, Senior Director Food Safety TreeHouse Foods, Peter Begg, Vice President Quality and Food Safety, Hearthside Food Solutions and Ann Marie McNamara, Vice-President Food Safety and Quality for Supply Chain, US Foods

Blending Employee Culture with Food Safety Culture: Melody Ge, FSQA Director, StarKist, Co., Mitzi Baum, CEO, STOP Foodborne Illness and Elise Forward

The Crossroads of Strategic, Tactical and Operational Planning in Food Safety Culture: Jill Stuber and Tia Glave, Co-Founders Catalyst

Biggest FSQA Challenges: Shawn Stevens, Attorney, Food Industry Counsel, Jorge Hernandez, VP, Quality Assurance, The Wendy’s Company, and Elise Forward, Founder & Principal Consultant, Forward Food Solutions

FSQA Technology: How Far is Too Far? How to properly analyze new FSQA technology before you sign the purchase order. Gary Smith, 1800FLOWERS.COM, Jorge Hernandez, The Wendy’s Company, and Peter Begg, Hearthside Food Solutions

Risk Assessment: Peter Begg, Hearthside Food Solutions, and Melanie Neumann, EVP & General Counsel, Matrix Sciences International

Audits: Blending in-person with Remote: Laurel Stoltzner, Corporate QA Manager OSI Industries, and Trish Wester, Association for Food Safety Auditing Professionals

Preparing the Next Generation of FSQA Leaders: Dr. Darin Detwiler, Northeastern University, Ann Marie McNamara, US Foods, and Dr. Don Schaffner, Rutgers University

View the full agenda.

Don’t miss out on opportunities to network with other food safety and quality professionals during the opening night reception, networking lunches and coffee breaks, and the Women in Food Safety cocktail reception on October 20.

Registration options are available for in-person and hybrid team attendance.

Event Hours

  • Wednesday, October 19: 1:00 pm – 6:30 pm (ET)
  • Thursday, October 20: 8:00 am – 7:00 pm (ET)
  • Friday, October 21: 8:00 am – 12:30 pm (ET)

Register today at foodsafetyconsortium.org.

 

Hazy IPA

Clearing the Beer Haze with Advanced Turbidity Testing Technologies

By Steve Guay
No Comments
Hazy IPA

Beer is one of the world’s oldest beverages, with evidence suggesting production as far back as the Bronze age. While beer is no longer used as renumeration for work as it was in the Mesopotamian Fertile Crescent, it is nevertheless a common pleasure for many people. Craft brewing is a relatively new phenomenon, and quite different from the brewing processes of antiquity. In the United States, immigrants from Germany and Czechia began to experiment with new recipes for craft beer in the 1960s. These recipes, often based on the Bavarian 16th century Reinheitsgebot, or purity laws, ensured that only the purest, highest quality ingredients went in to make beer: Water, barley, hops and yeast.

Since then, there has been a rapid growth in the number of microbreweries that experiment with “new-world” hops and grains to create huge ranges of flavorful beers that go far beyond traditional recipes. This variety in brewing ingredients and approaches has, in part, supported the explosion of a mass market for craft beer. In 2020, the global market value of craft beer was estimated at nearly $165 billion, and is expected to grow to nearly $554 Billion by 2027, with the largest growing markets in countries like China, Japan and the United States. There has also been a shift in which types of beers are consumed, with more premium or specialized craft beers increasing in market share with respect to low-cost mass-production beers.

In such a crowded and dynamic market, beer producers are faced with competitive challenges like never before. Ensuring a consistently high-quality product with a distinctive flavor profile that can be enjoyed time and time again is critical for market success. One of the key challenges standing in the way of achieving this is turbidity, or “haze”, in the end product. Such haze can give an unsightly first impression to consumers, compromise flavor, and negatively impacts shelf stability. In this article we discuss how new, advanced turbidity testing technologies are enabling brewers to quickly and efficiently eliminate haze from their beers, supporting breweries in their goals of delivering great consumer experiences again and again.

Quality over Quantity

With the growing “premiumization” of beers, ever-greater attention and importance is being placed on interesting and consistent flavor profiles. Often, this includes beers made from ingredients far outside the relatively strict Reinheitsgebot recipe, including additions such as coffee, fruit and spices. The emphasis on more complex flavor profiles is pushing beer tasting to be taken as seriously as wine tasting, with perfectly balanced beers often being designed to match certain foods.

However, the addition of these newer ingredients can introduce challenges into the brewing process, especially as they can be sources of turbidity-causing impurities that may affect the quality, flavor and shelf stability of the final product. This is particularly challenging when beer brewing is scaled up to larger manufacturing quotas, where careful control of variables like ingredient choices, recipes and manufacturing methods are critical for ensuring the consistency and quality of the beer from batch to batch.

To meet these needs, modern breweries are increasingly using new and advanced technologies throughout the brewing process to maintain high quality products. Technologies like water purification systems, titrators and portable instruments such as hand-held pH meters and spectrophotometers are all being utilized to improve and refine the manufacturing process. A major focus of this technological drive is in turbidity detection and removal.

What Is Haze, and Where Does It Come From?

Haze is a broad term referring to evenly distributed turbidity—suspended, insoluble material which can appear in the final product. Haze can be divided into several types, most commonly: Chill haze, a temporary haze that disappears when a chilled beer warms to room temperature; and permanent haze, which is present at all temperatures. Haze can also be divided into biological haze (caused by microbiological growth in the beer) and non-biological haze (caused by a wide variety of non-living material, such as peptides, polyphenols and starches).

Hazy IPA
With the rising popularity of craft beer, many companies and customers are embracing intentionally ‘cloudy’ beers, which can make detecting offending turbidity even more challenging. All images courtesy of Thermo Fisher Scientific.

Since turbidity can be the result of unwanted microbes, wild yeast or protein particles, these deposits, although not unsafe to consume, can significantly alter the flavor profile of the beer, adding unpleasant acidity, sourness, or even “off” flavors. Bacteria are one of the major sources of turbidity in beers, particularly lactic acid-producing bacteria (LAB), such as Lactobacillus. While small amounts of lactic acid can add pleasant, desirable sour flavors in sour beers, the over-presence of these bacteria can be a major cause of contamination, so their levels must be closely monitored in the brewing process. Other bacteria like Pectinatus species can also “infect” beers, causing turbidity as well as “off” aromas and flavors due to the creation of hydrogen sulfide and fatty acids.

Importantly, turbidity-causing compounds can collect in the product from all stages of the brewing process:

  1. This starts with the source of water, and how it is filtered and treated. For example, a high presence of calcium in brewing water can cause precipitation of calcium oxalate.
  2. Mashing, the first stage of the brewing process, produces a malt extract from mixing grains and water. The malt extract is a liquid containing sugar extracted during mashes and has high viscosity and high protein content. At this stage fungi (like Penecillium), wild yeasts (Candida) and bacteria can all enter the mix to cause turbidity later on.
  3. From there, the process of lautering separates the wort from the grain. The wort is then boiled with hops, clarified, then fermented with yeast. The fermentation process is a common step when turbidity-causing bacteria like Lactobacillus and Pediococcus can contaminate the mixture.
  4. The fermented beer product is then stored for anything from three weeks to three months in a storage tank where a second fermentation takes place. Then it is filtered and packaged into barrels, bottles, or cans; all of which are also potential sources of turbidity-causing bacteria like Pectinatus.

The filtration and pasteurization processes are key for removing sources of turbidity. However, these processes do not necessarily remove all sources of turbidity, especially if aspects of the brewing process are altered by external factors (e.g., subtle shifts in the mashing temperatures) and cause a buildup of contaminants that is too great to filter out. Therefore, effectively monitoring and minimizing turbidity throughout the brewing process is critical, allowing brewers to make timely corrective adjustments, reducing a buildup of contaminants in the final product.

Advanced Methods for Turbidity Testing

To support effective haze removal and ensure beer consistency, turbidity measurements must be taken throughout the entire brewing process. Measurements should therefore be quick and efficient, and able to measure large quantities of beer in a short space of time, especially in high-production breweries. As such, advanced on-site turbidity testing technologies that are efficient and easy to use are ideal, and can rapidly streamline quality control in the brewing process. For example, with turbidity meters, breweries can swiftly check that their fining or filtration process is yielding a desired end product, and if an issue arises during the clarification process, an onsite turbidity measurement can pick this up right away for speedy corrective action. Such speedy rectification minimizes the chances of ruined batches and resultant profit loss to the brewery.

Handheld Turbidity Meter
Advanced portable turbidity meters enable efficient and reliable measurements on-site to streamline quality control in the brewery.

Modern turbidity meters work by using an infrared LED light source to measure light scattering in a solution. These handy devices allow brewers to perform rapid testing of beer with simple grab samples, meaning samples can be analyzed without having to disturb the brewing process. The LED light sources used in more advanced meters also have several benefits. For example, the LED does not require a warm-up period like older tungsten lamps, meaning it is ready to use at all times. Secondly, infrared LED light sources prevent color interference, which is especially useful for testing darker beers. Finally, the LED will last the life of the meter and give stable signals, meaning that calibration does not drift. Turbidity meters can also test for chill haze, allowing brewers to check for problems that can cause the beer to turn cloudy during prolonged chilling.

Quality Kings

Quality control of the brewing process is crucial for maintaining the quality and consistency of beer products that keep customers returning time and time again to their beers of choice. In a hyper-competitive market, brewers must use all the advantages they can to stay ahead of the game. Hazy beers can be particularly off-putting to customers if they are expecting bright, clear products, and critical qualities like taste and aroma can be very unpleasant if contamination isn’t carefully controlled. Moreover, unwanted turbidity in beers can negatively impact shelf stability, with resultant impact on profitability and brand reputation.

Owing to the complexity of beer making, the sources of turbidity are multiple, meaning that careful testing of turbidity is critical. In helping to overcome these challenges, advanced turbidity meters are enabling brewers to perform efficient and simple measurements on-site throughout the brewing process. This is helping to drive more timely tweaks to the brewing, filtration and storage steps to ensure consistent, high-quality beers with carefully crafted flavor profiles reach the market.

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.

Recall

Q2 Food Recalls Increase 20%, Undeclared Allergens and Quality Top Cause

By Food Safety Tech Staff
No Comments
Recall

For the 23rd quarter in a row, undeclared allergens were the top cause of food recalls and accounted for 45% of them in Q3 2021, according to Sedgwick’s latest Recall Index report. Within allergens, undeclared milk was the leading cause and prepared foods remained the leading category.

“Companies need to concentrate on the basics through the second half of 2021 and final emergence from the COVID-19 pandemic,” the report states. “Amid supply chain pressures, high consumer demand and worker health and safety concerns arising from the coronavirus, food businesses are rightfully focused on their ability to maintain and conduct their core operations in safe manner while delivering quality, safe products to customers.”

FDA Recalls: Notable Numbers (Q2 2021)

  • 106 recalls affecting 7.9 million units
  • 5.8 million units (nearly 69%) impacted by recalls were due to one nut recall
  • 19 recalls were a result of quality issues
  • 18 recalls were a result of foreign material contamination
  • 11 recalls were a result of bacterial contamination—6 from Listeria; 4 Salmonella; and 1 E. coli

USDA Recalls: Notable Numbers (Q2 2021)

  • Recalls increased from 10 (Q1) to 12, but numbers still low compared to 2019 quarterly averages
  • Units impacted dramatically dropped nearly 83% to 207,322 units
  • Undeclared allergens were top cause of recalls, accounting for nearly 42%
    • Soy milk and eggs were main allergens, but first recall of food products due to sesame also occurred
  • Other recall reasons were quality (2), lack of inspection (2), bacterial contamination (2) and foreign material contamination (1)
  • Beef products (93,551 pounds) most impacted category, followed by fish (46,804 pounds)

The report also pointed out that heavy metal regulation will have increased emphasis, as FDA has made it a priority as a result of a report released by Congress earlier this year indicating the presence of dangerous toxic heavy metals found in baby foods.

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.
Jason Chester, InfinityQS
FST Soapbox

Resilience for Tomorrow Begins with Digital Transformation Today

By Jason Chester
1 Comment
Jason Chester, InfinityQS

COVID-19 has been a sharp wake-up call for many food manufacturers in the need for resilient production environments that can readily respond to large and sudden changes, including fluctuations in demand and disruptive external events. This means being able to optimize operations for the following:

  • Efficiency: Where you can achieve constant output even when given fewer inputs—such as in workforce availability or resources. This was especially important when the pandemic caused widespread supply shortages, as well as staffing shortages due to social distancing measures.
  • Productivity: When you can ensure that, given the amount of available input (i.e., raw ingredients, manpower, equipment availability), you can maintain a consistent output to meet demand in the marketplace.
  • Flexibility: Where you can rapidly and intelligently adapt your processes in the face of change, in ways that are in the best interest of your business, the supply chain, and the consumers who purchase and trust in your products.

That trust is paramount, as manufacturers must continue to uphold quality and safety standards—especially during a time when public health is of the upmost importance. But between operational challenges and managing product quality, that’s a lot for manufacturers to wade through during a crisis.

To navigate the current COVID reality and improve response to future events, more organizations are looking to harness the power of data to enable agile decision-making and, in turn, build more resilient production environments.

Harnessing the Power of Data

The key to harnessing data for agile decisions is to aggregate end-to-end process information and make it available in real time. When you can achieve that, it’s possible to run analytics and derive timely insights into every facet of production. Those insights can be used to increase efficiency, productivity and flexibility—as well as ensure product quality and safety—even amidst upheaval.

When looking at solutions to aggregate data from a single site—or better yet, multiple sites—all roads lead to the cloud. Namely, cloud-based quality intelligence solutions can decouple the data from physical locations—such as paper checklists, forms, or supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) and human-machine interfaces (HMI) systems—and centralize what’s collected digitally in a unified repository. The data can then be accessed, analyzed, and consumed by those who need actionable insights from anywhere, at any time, and on any device, making cloud an ideal solution for connecting on-site operators and remote employees.

Digital transformation
When process and quality data are centralized and standardized on the cloud, they can be leveraged for real-time monitoring and timely response to issues—from anywhere and at any time. (Image courtesy of InfinityQS)

An Opportunity for Broader Transformation

In migrating to the cloud, manufacturers open the opportunity to break away from the legacy, manual processes of yesterday and transition to more nimble, digitally enabled environments of tomorrow. For example, manual processes are often highly dependent on individual operator knowledge, experience and judgement. As the pandemic has shown, such institutional knowledge can be lost when employees become ill, or are unavailable due to self-isolation or travel restrictions, presenting a risk to operational efficiency and productivity. But if that valuable institutional knowledge were captured and codified in a quality intelligence solution as predefined workflows and prescriptive instructions, then a manufacturer could more easily move their resources and personnel around as necessary and find comfort knowing that processes will be executed according to best practices.

For many organizations, this would be a remarkable transformation in the ways of working, where data and digital technologies can augment human capacity and flexibility. Take for instance, in traditional production environments, a lot of human effort is spent on monitoring lines to catch process deviations or events like machine anomalies or quality issues. Using real-time data, next-generation solutions can take on that burden and continuously monitor what’s happening on the plant floor—only alerting relevant teams when an issue arises and they need to intervene. Manufacturers can thereby redeploy people to other tasks, while minimizing the amount of resources necessary to manage product quality and safety during daily production and in the event of disruption.

Ensuring Quality Upstream and Downstream

One company that has succeeded in digital transformation is King & Prince, a manufacturer of breaded, battered and seasoned seafood. When the company digitized its manufacturing processes, it centralized the quality data from all points of origin in a single database. The resulting real-time visibility enables King & Prince to monitor quality on more than 100 processes across three U.S. plants, as well as throughout a widespread network of global suppliers.

With this type of real-time visibility, a company can work with suppliers to correct any quality issues before raw materials are shipped to the United States, which directly translates to a better final product. This insight also helps plant-based procurement managers determine which suppliers to use. Within its own plants, operators receive alerts during production if there are any variations in the data that may indicate inconsistencies. They can thereby stop the process, make necessary adjustments, and use the data again to confirm when everything is back on track.

During finished product inspections, the company can also review the captured data to determine if they need to finetune any processes upstream and respond sooner to prevent issues from making it downstream to the consumer level. Overall, the company is able to better uphold its quality and safety standards, with the number of customer complaints regarding its seafood products dropping to less than one per million pounds sold year over year—and that’s all thanks to the harnessing of data in a digitally enabled production environment.

There’s No Time Like the Present

In truth, technologies like the cloud and quality intelligence solutions, and even the concept of digital transformation, aren’t new. They’ve been on many company agendas for some time, but just haven’t been a high priority. But when the pandemic hit, organizations were suddenly faced with the vulnerabilities of their long-held operational processes and legacy technologies. Now, with the urgency surrounding the need for resilient production environments, these same companies are thinking about how to tactically achieve digital transformation in the span of a few weeks or months rather than years.

Yet while digital transformation may sound like a tremendous initiative with high risks and expenses, it’s more tangible than some may think. For example, cloud-based Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) solutions offer flexible subscription-based models that keep costs low on top of rapid scalability. Digital transformation doesn’t have to be an all-or-nothing endeavor either. In fact, it can be better to progress incrementally, starting first with the manufacturing areas that are most in need or have the most issues. This minimizes unnecessary risk, makes digital transformation more achievable and realistic over short timeframes, and avoids overwhelming already maxed out operational and IT teams.

All things must pass. The pandemic will eventually be over. But in its wake will be a permanent legacy on not just society, but also on the manufacturing sector. In my opinion, digital transformation is a fundamental basis for building resilience into the modern food production environment. Now, more than ever, is the time to address that opportunity head on.

Melody Ge
Women in Food Safety

Keep the Door Open to All Experiences

By Melody Ge
No Comments
Melody Ge

I recently sat down with Peter Begg, vice president of quality and food safety at Glanbia Nutritionals where he shared his personal experiences and advice for how to build a career path and grow into a leader. There are a lot of opportunities, and it’s important to remember that a food safety career is not short term—you are in it for the long haul—so don’t be in a hurry, find your own balance, and enjoy life! Have fun! Life is too short to work 24/7.

Differing from many food safety professionals, Peter started his career within the food industry as a chemical engineer at Kraft after graduating from Penn State University; now 26 years in the industry, Peter leads a global food safety and quality team at Glanbia Nutritionals. He had a couple of major pivots in his career that led him to where he is today. At the beginning of his career, he joined the R&D department at Kraft Foods, and made the decision to move to Switzerland to take on the company’s European quality team. After three years abroad, he returned to the United States, where he participated in the split of Kraft into Kraft Foods and Mondelez International. Today, in addition to his current role at Glanbia, he also leads the company’s COVID response team. When taking a look back, he affirmed that he made all the right decisions and was glad he didn’t say no to any opportunities that arose.

During the interview, Peter advised young female professionals to be patient and to avoid being in a hurry. Also, find a career path you are passionate about: “When you are passionate, a lot of the challenges or difficulties will pass,” he said. “However, don’t be opposed to trying different roles, especially early in your career. Be open to those other experiences, because they will help you later on.” Additionally, don’t assume that the first experience is going to be the only career path that you will have. Even if you move from R&D to marketing or procurement, that experience will help you. It offers a different way of looking at things. “Nothing you do will be wasted.” I can’t agree more on this point.

Peter Begg
Peter Begg will participate in a panel discussion about Professional Development & Women in Food Safety during the November 5 episode of the 2020 Food Safety Consortium Virtual Conference Series

When we talked about food science career options for students, Peter had a unique point of explaining the two common options: R&D and Food Safety and Quality. Peter distinguished them by the sense of urgency and challenges of those roles. A project within R&D is normally six months to a year, with timelines to complete the project; whereas within safety and quality, a project could be one day or one week, and is often hard to predict, as every day brings something new. “If you are a person who loves challenges and changes then you might find more achievements in food safety and quality,” he said. “I enjoy the diversity of challenges every day, and this is the reason I didn’t go back to R&D.”

One thing that resonated with me long after the conversation was a tip that Peter would have given to his younger self: “Don’t sweat the small stuff. As you gain more experience, you learn to focus on the things that make the real difference. I know that sounds trite, but you have to get better at triaging and understanding what is important,” he explained.

At the end, Peter pointed out that we still need more diversity in the C-suite and at the SVP level. He learned a lot from his first boss who was a successful female leader. Female leaders are more empathetic and tend to lead without feeling the need to fill airtime. “I have known so many women leaders. They are comfortable in who they are as a leader, and I have a tremendous amount of respect for that,” Peter said.

At the same time, Peter continues to encourage female leaders to be more self-confident. He told us, “Don’t doubt yourself! If you keep getting told ‘no’, it affects your self-confidence, however, it has to be overcome; it takes all of us to remember that we all bring different things to the table.”

Peter shared a couple of personal stories that he found impactful as well. As a leader, Peter cannot emphasize enough about the beauty of diverse thoughts on a team. He learned one can never know everything. As a leader, it’s our responsibility to lead and encourage team members to speak up and grow together; also, always remain calm and solve problems based on facts.

Peter concluded our conversation by emphasizing that we all need to find our own balance to enjoy life. The work/life balance: We work to live, not the other way around. There will be ups and downs. There will be long days, but we can find other days to balance them, and it is important to have an outlet. Life is too short; it needs to be fun—not just work 24/7!

“The real leaders were the ones who spoke to the facts and remained calm and focused on what we needed to do to solve the issues.” – Peter Begg, Glanbia Nutritionals

Melody Ge: What have you learned by working with and mentoring female leaders?

Begg: From a leadership standpoint, my first boss at Kraft was a female and we still keep in touch. She was a great teacher and mentor. There’s an empathy that female leaders have that not all male leaders have. Also, when I made the move to Mondelez and I worked for the head of research & development and quality who is another phenomenal female leader, she had a style about her that kept everyone at ease. She would ask very poignant questions, but she didn’t overuse airtime. I’ve seen men hog all the airtime, because they want everyone to know they are the smartest one in the room. I haven’t seen that with some of the female leaders; they are comfortable in who they are as a leader, and I have a tremendous amount of respect for that.

Right now, I have six directors and four of them are female. To be fair, I think in our function of Quality and Food Safety you do see at least 50% [balance]. For me, it’s the diversity of thought brought to the team. There are different ways of looking at things from men versus women. I think that ability to communicate and be empathetic is something I see out of female leaders. I’ve learned 26 years in that I don’t know everything. Having that diversity of thought and background is absolutely critical to having a strong leadership team and also to make decisions that are well thought through.

To be honest, I think what we are lacking is the diversity at the VP and SVP level and above where it is still pretty male dominated, and that needs to change. I see a lot of strong up-and-coming females; there’s talent out there that I hope continues to grow in the future.

Ge: Why do you think there is a lack of females at the VP and SVP level? Is there any insight you can share?

Begg: One of the reasons is because that, with many leaders, they want people who they can trust. A lot of people look to those who act like themselves. It takes a lot of good thought to take yourself out of that and really look at who is the best leader for your team. I think part of the reason is that many of the CEOs and SVPs are male. We still need more diversity in the C-suite.

Ge: Can you share an unforgettable story that had an impact on you?

Begg: There are two that come to mind.

  1. I was a very new leader within R&D at the time and leading a cross functional team. One of my team members came up with what I thought was a pretty good idea. I shared it at a meeting, and everyone liked it. But what I failed to do was not recognize the team member whose idea that it was. The team member was really upset and felt like I presented it as my idea. That, of course, wasn’t my intent, but I learned that my job as a leader is to set my team up for success and not get in the way. You also have to give proper credit and acknowledgement. That is something to this day that I keep in the back of my mind—to make sure that I always recognize my team publicly, especially when they are the ones driving the effort. I am not on the frontlines, my team is. I have to make sure that I remember that you need to take the time to acknowledge people.
  2. When I was in Europe in the quality and food safety role, we had a situation where we were very close to a 27-country recall. It’s something I will never forget because of the intensity of the conversations that were had all the way up to the CEO of Kraft at the time. It ended up that we were able to narrow it and my team did a phenomenal job on tracing the recall down to two countries. What I remember most in that setting, where you’re with all these senior executives, is that the real leaders were the ones who spoke to the facts and remained calm and focused on what we needed to do. The people who I didn’t want to be like were the ones who were emotional and flying off the handle about things that had nothing to do with what we were trying to resolve in the situation. As a leader, you have to project a presence and a sense of calm in a food safety crisis. If you’re in a food safety and quality role, something will happen along the way that is challenging. That is just the nature of what we deal with.

Ge: What would you hope to see in next three to five years for women in the industry?

Begg: Definitely more female outstanding professionals. At Glanbia, we hire 15–20 grads in the U.S. every year through campus recruiting, and it’s at least 50% female. The talent pool is there—but how are we nurturing them, and giving them the support and career guidance? Everyone across the industry needs to have these conversations and talk about the key experiences, key skills and capabilities that they should be building throughout their career. There are certain things that are translatable regardless of the type of job that you have, such as communication skills. Secondly, helping women build the confidence that they can be successful and that there will be opportunities. As a leader, I am part of creating those opportunities and will continue doing so.

Megan Nichols
FST Soapbox

Four Influential Technologies Changing Food Manufacturing

By Megan Ray Nichols
No Comments
Megan Nichols

Some impressive technologies are not only impacting the food industry right now but will also have a huge impact in the future. As their use grows to be more prevalent, the industry will change to be smarter and more efficient, with continued improvements across the board.

1. AI and Advanced Robotics

While artificial intelligence and advanced robotics are two distinct technologies, they are frequently paired together. AI, and the data it digests, is used to command robots, allowing them to be more precise, more intelligent and more aware.

Most robots on their own are capable of completing only repetitive and clearly defined tasks. Throw something unique into the mix and they’ll either fumble or fail. However, when governed by data-based intelligence solutions like AI or machine learning, those robots become something incredibly advanced.

In the food industry, machinery and robots are leveraged to improve operations, further maintaining quality and efficiency, at affordable costs. They often work alongside human laborers to augment or enhance processes. They come with several unexpected benefits as well, such as much-improved safety for workers, faster and higher product output and consistent, reliable quality.

For example, JBS, one of the world’s largest meatpacking firms, deployed robotic butchers within its plants. The robots were used to slice more challenging meats, which reduced workplace injuries.

2. Automation

Automation stands alongside AI and advanced robotics, even incorporating those technologies to create a streamlined system. As of 2017, 73% of surveyed companies in the food and beverage manufacturing industry either had or were in the process of establishing automation within their facilities.

Many systems are designed to replace or enhance repetitive tasks, boosting their speed and accuracy, to significantly improve output, without incurring a loss in quality. It’s not just about hardware, like swapping a human laborer for a robot. It’s also achieved through software. Think supply chain management solutions that help plan for various events and experiences without human input.

When many of these technologies are used side-by-side, it strengthens their application and usability. As is true of advanced robotics, for example, AI can also be used to create more intelligent automation platforms. Instead of carrying out rote or simple tasks, they can be programmed to react and engage through any number of parameters. The system might slow production, for instance, based on a decrease in product demand. Or, it might swap to an alternate component or ingredient because of a shortage somewhere.

With the right controls and support, automation technologies are game-changing. With the global population growing and demands increasing more with each year, food manufacturers will look to streamline their operations and boost output in any way possible, and automation will be a go-to.

3. Digital Twins

Digital twins in food manufacturing are essentially simulated copies or a virtual representation of a physical system. That definition might seem confusing, but think of it as a clone that can be manipulated for testing and analytics.In other words, it is a twin of the actual system and information, in every sense of the word, albeit one that is more versatile and less vulnerable. It allows manufacturers and distributors to run simulations by feeding specific information into the system to identify patterns, recognize outcomes and much more.

As the systems and controls supporting the field become smarter and more digitized, digital twins in food manufacturing will find their way into product development, testing, post-production, distribution and nearly every other facet of the industry. It will become an integral component to not only understand what’s happening in the market but also for keeping up with the ebb and flow of supply and demand.

4. Blockchain

Even well before the pandemic, people had become much more conscious about the foods they consume. They want to know the origin of their goods and whether they’ve been sourced using safe, healthy and environmentally friendly methods. The problem with such demands is that, until recently, there haven’t been many solutions for increased visibility within the food supply chain.

Growing concerns for health are now a priority, and visibility is an absolute must. Blockchain technology is the answer, providing precisely the kind of visibility, efficiency, controls and collaboration that consumers want.

With this food manufacturing technology in place, someone could trace a head of lettuce back to its initial seeding. They can see who grew the plants and where, and which methods they used to mature the crop. Then, they can follow its journey to the store shelf.

How is such a thing possible? It all has to do with the technology. In its simplest form, Blockchain is a digital ledger or complete and digitized record of a particular data set. The data that goes in is added to something called a block, and as more is added, it is tacked on to the end of that block to create a long, linked record. Every bit of information is visible across the entire chain, hence the name blockchain.

Walmart is using the technology to track potential food contamination outbreaks. It empowers them to not just find the source but also find the many branches involved — like where goods might have been shipped and who may have purchased them.

Food Manufacturing Technology for the Future

While each food manufacturing technology discussed here is incredibly influential and will have a direct impact on the future of the industry, they are not the only solutions making waves. Some additional examples include:

  • Drones and automated delivery vehicles
  • 3-D printing for edible goods
  • Smart or precision agriculture
  • High-tech packaging
  • Smarter waste disposal and recycling

The takeaway is that technology is vastly improving the operational efficiency of the food supply chain, from farmers and manufacturers to the retail stores featuring goods on their shelves. There’s no right or wrong buy-in, as any one of these technologies can be used to streamline separate processes. The biggest challenge will be deciding what to upgrade first, especially when it comes to delivering high-quality, fresh goods in a prompt manner.