A&M’s Acuff tells Ontario better HACCP, not more inspectors, for food safety

18.nov.09
Ontario Farmer
Jim Romahn
MISSISSAUGA –- Food inspection needs to become more science based, Dr. Gary Acuff, a food microbiologist from the Department of Animal Science at Texas A&M told the 51st annual meeting of the Ontario Food Protection Association here recently.
He said much of what’s being done, such as increasing the number of federal meat inspectors in packing plants, isn’t doing much to improve the safety of the food supply.
Nor is much of the sampling and testing done by companies and government inspectors, he said.
What works is close attention to the processes in the packing plants, he said. That’s what the Hazard Analysis Critical Control Points programs are supposed to do.
Acuff said it’s neither practical nor possible to eliminate food poisonings by testing foods at processing plants.
Not every package or patty heading for sale can be tested, and even if a sample was drawn from every one, harmful bacteria might still slip through.
So, for example, a New York company that was testing the hamburger patties it was making every 15 minutes missed serious E. coli 0157:H7 contamination that resulted in two deaths and 28 sick people.
The company had to recall 546,000 pounds of ground beef, Acuff said.
It thought it was doing a great job on food safety, he said.
“They were testing probably more than anybody else in the industry,” Acuff said, and both the beef trimmings coming in and the meat patties going out.
“They were devastated they didn’t detect it,” he said of the E. coli that poisoned people.
What this plant needs is a much more rigorous HACCP program.
“If you can’t prove with your HACCP program that you have a safe product, then you don’t have a good HACCP program,” he said.
He did not comment on any of the Canadian on-farm food-safety programs that claim they are based on HACCP principles.
Acuff said that the New York ground beef processor likely can’t prove its products are safe without using irradiation, yet the public is unlikely to accept irradiated meat.
That leaves temperature controls as the main alternative.
Acuff said his team at Texas A&M wanted to try tight controls so fresh beef could be delivered to customers in Japan. They got grudging approval from a beef-packing plant to slow down the slaughter operation for their trial which involved greater care in removing the hide and guts and keeping the surroundings clean.
They turned off the fans so there would be less bacteria swirling in the air, the staff donned gloves and increased the frequency of sanitizing knives.
However, the whole project came to a screeching halt when the federal meat inspector pointed to condensation that was forming on the ceiling.
Acuff said that condensation was irrelevant to food safety, yet an inspector working with rules based on traditions stopped the project.
That, he suggested, is what’s wrong with much of today’s meat inspection system. Every time there’s an outbreak of food poisoning traced to meat, the public demands more inspectors, more testing and stricter enforcement, he said.
That’s precisely the government and company response to the Listeria monocytogenes outbreak at Maple Leaf Foods two years ago. Acuff said what’s required is a science-based examination of the process, and a risk-based regulatory system.
But the public is wary of any changes in the regulatory inspection system, he said.
There is a strong reaction to science underway across North America, he said, and people are embracing traditions and old ways of doing things – raw milk, organics, raw vegetables, etc.
He said people are just as likely to believe testimonials as science-based systems, such as letters to the editor extolling the virtues of raw milk from people who say they no longer suffer allergies or need antibiotics.
He showed a picture of a poster advertising a raw milk symposium in Toronto featuring “from production to consumption.”
“Consumption is what we used to call tuberculosis,” he said, and showed a number of reports of cases where people have been sickened by drinking raw milk and eating cheddar cheeses made from raw milk.
Dr. Scott Weese of Ontario Veterinary College at the University of Guelph outlined what’s been learned so far about Clostridium difficile in beef cattle, hogs, sheep and poultry and possible links to serious human illnesses and deaths.
In a nutshell, he said much remains to be determined, but it is clear that this stubborn bacteria is almost everywhere, including in many cattle and hogs and even in vegetables and drinking water.
But what degree of risk that poses to the health of people has been difficult to determine. What might be possible is that people get this bacteria, don’t get sick, but spores develop a stick around in their digestive system for weeks or months.
If and when those spores develop at a time when the person is vulnerable, or some condition is right for the bacteria to greatly multiply and produce toxins, the person can become deadly ill, Weese speculated.

The 2010 Food Safety Summit will take place April 12 - 14, 2010 at the Washington DC Convention Center. It will provide educational programming, networking receptions and a valuable exhibition hall for industry professionals who are charged with the protection of our food supply chain. Those professionals include personnel from the processing, retail/food service, academia, government sectors and more. For more information visit their web site: http://www.foodsafetysummit.com/